Debt: the perfection of voluntary servitude

[shikamaru]

I suppose it depends on the nature of the minority. If the minority has the morals of feral beasts vs if they are benevolent shepherds and guardians over their brethren who are allowed to grow and expand as they gather wisdom and knowledge and without interference or oppression. Like with a hammer, depends on whose hand its in.

If the mob or the minority are as feral beasts, it seems you'd have a farm or a jungle rather than a government.

On that note, the record seems to show a tendency of influences conspiring to push America away from traditional morals toward a more base system--key activity perhaps revving up more significantly around the 1830s or 1840s. Could removal of gold/silver from circulation have been intended to be a way to depose (i.e. eliminate/cripple) lawful government? With funny money how could you have a de jure claim at law?

This all reminds me of Plato's discussions concerning the attributes of an ideal republic in his book, "Republic". It too was oligarchical in form.

Funny you mention money, government, and morals. In the book, "The Lost Science of Money", as the currency was debased so too did government, morals, and society debase in kind.

[allodial]

This all reminds me of Plato's discussions concerning the attributes of an ideal republic in his book, "Republic". It too was oligarchical in form.

Funny you mention money, government, and morals. In the book, "The Lost Science of Money", as the currency was debased so too did government, morals, and society debase in kind.

AFAIK a key difference between Aristotle and Plato is that Aristotle embraced the idea of soul-less man and oligarchy. Plato had a rather different view. For some reason it seems public education in the USA tries to equate them. Aristotle would likely be quoted moreso by secular humanists than by others.

Re: money and morality... you'd almost figure someone has it down to a science.

[shikamaru]

AFAIK a key difference between Aristotle and Plato is that Aristotle embraced the idea of soul-less man and oligarchy. Plato had a rather different view. For some reason it seems public education in the USA tries to equate them. Aristotle would likely be quoted moreso by secular humanists than by others.

I believe (don't quote me on this) that Aristotle also embraced that some men were born to rule while others are natural born slaves.

Re: money and morality... you'd almost figure someone has it down to a science.

Seems the controllers or beneficiaries of money always desire to circumvent 'thou shalt not steal' along with the necessities of working.

[xparte]

In the wilds A wolf pact is absent philosophy however the physiology is dominant regardless of fairness all are tolerable for physiological reasons.Is Plato,s dominance tolerable or can anybody leave the republic or the cave regardless of physiological fairness. Any flaw in the wild is corrected immediately only flaw with Man is exploitation whether gradual or immediate the balance waits on fairness.

[stoneFree]

Are you a bot? Here's how to check:

Propagandists Use Automated Software to Spread Disinformation

[shikamaru]

Debt is also a form of subjugation and quiet (as well as subtle) warfare.

[allodial]

I believe (don't quote me on this) that Aristotle also embraced that some men were born to rule while others are natural born slaves.

You're on the trail. You'll likely find Aristotlean ideals embraced by the would-be Oligarchs.

Seems the controllers or beneficiaries of money always desire to circumvent 'thou shalt not steal' along with the necessities of working.

That might be as far as they care for the Bible--a work motivation tool. But is it stealing when you are simply recovering what is owed to you?

Debt is also a form of subjugation and quiet (as well as subtle) warfare.

I would tend to suggest debt as being a potential tool for subjugation or quiet warfare rather than it being a warfare itself.